WASHINGTON — Seeking an elusive middle ground, President Barack Obama is proposing a 2014 budget that embraces tax increases abhorred by Republicans as well as reductions, loathed by liberals, in the growth of Social Security and other benefit programs.

The plan, if ever enacted, could touch almost all Americans. The rich would see tax increases, the poor and the elderly would get smaller annual increases in their benefits, and middle income taxpayers would slip into higher tax brackets despite Obama’s repeated vows not to add to the tax burden of the middle class. His proposed changes, once phased in, would mean a cut in Social Security benefits of nearly $1,000 a year for an average 85-year-old, smaller cuts for younger retirees.

Obama proposed much the same without success to House Speaker John Boehner in December. The response Friday was dismissive from Republicans and hostile from liberals, labor and advocates for the elderly.

As usual, Obama is as politically brilliant as he is completely morally depraved.

He recognizes that the elderly now overwhelmingly vote Republican – because as stupid as our elderly are today, they are smarter than the young punks whom Obama owns.

Obama realizes what many Democrats in their districts don’t: that the elderly aren’t Obama worshippers.

And that therefore the elderly are blasphemers who deserve to die.

What group DOES vote for Obama? The ignorant young punks.

And what do the ignorant young punks want?

They want socialism. They want Obama to take care of them.

What is getting in the way of the godless socialist State that the young want? Old people – and the benefits being consumed by old people.

How can young people get free health care when the old are getting most of the government bennies? How can young people ever hope to have a viable Social Security system when the system promised to the elderly is bankrupting America?

The answer is that if you kill off all the elderly, you can make the same false promises to the young that the FDR generation of Democrats once made to the elderly of today.

You can find these quotes along with many others in the articles above, but let me start with the words of lifelong Democrat and Obama supporter Robert Reich:

“Thank you so much for coming this afternoon. I’m so glad to see you and I would like to be president. Let me tell you a few things on health care. Look, we have the only health care system in the world that is designed to avoid sick people. And that’s true and what I’m going to do is that I am going try to reorganize it to be more amenable to treating sick people but that means you, particularly you young people, particularly you young healthy people…you’re going to have to pay more.

“Thank you. And by the way, we’re going to have to, if you’re very old, we’re not going to give you all that technology and all those drugs for the last couple of years of your life to keep you maybe going for another couple of months. It’s too expensive…so we’re going to let you die.”

And here’s now-former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel’s brother, Ezekiel Emanuel, whom Obama appointed as OMB health policy adviser in addition to being picked to serve on the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research:

“When implemented, the Complete Lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated… The Complete Lives system justifies preference to younger people because of priority to the worst-off rather than instrumental value.”

“Attenuated” means, “to make thin; to weaken or reduce in force, intensity, effect, quantity, or value.” Attenuated care would be reduced or lessened care. Dare I say it, in this context it clearly means, “rationed care.”

And “rationed care” means death panels. Which again for the record überliberal Paul Krugman says are an essential part of ObamaCare – all previous Democrat lies to the contrary.

I’ve been saying it all along.

I couldn’t understand why Democrats refused to take ANY of the corrective actions necessary to save Medicare – which will go bankrupt and collapse by 2016. And now Social Security – which is now in debt to the tune of tens of billions of dollars a year. A few minor changes could have saved these programs – but Democrats are in lock-fascist step determined NOT to allow those changes.

Understand: my PARENTS are on these programs. As terrible and as godawful as these programs are given the private-sector alternatives that Democrats refused to allow or even consider, they were the only path for my parents’ – and millions and millions of other people’s parents’ – retirement. Republicans proposed to gradually phase in reduced benefits beginning for those who had at least ten working years remaining to prepare alternative strategies (which would also give the country time to prepare those alternatives). Current retirees would have been untouched.

Democrats refused to make any changes and falsely and frankly demonically demagogued the lie that Republicans were trying to kill old people (again, their changes wouldn’t have affected ANY “old people.” I couldn’t understand why Democrats would allow the systems that THEY created to simply implode.

If we just made a few minor changes, we could keep these programs going. It is insane that Democrats refuse to make those changes. The reason that Europe is going through all the “austerity” crap is because they did what the Democrats are doing now in America; they refused to make minor changes and then they went bankrupt and now there is no way out of their crisis.

I now DO understand the reason Democrats won’t make the changes we need when there’s still time to make those changes: Democrats plan to turn on the elderly whom they promised they would take care of through these programs. When they collapse – and they surely will – Democrats will “pivot” to the young voters and leave the elderly to die.

Democrats seized power by lying to the people who are now “the elderly.” They can now leave those elderly to perish and sell their lies to a whole new generation of truly stupid young people.

Barack Obama realizes that he will profit politically if he wages his style of fearmongering and divisive campaigning and pits the young against the old (just as he pitted minorities against white people and women against men and the poor against the rich). He realizes that he doesn’t need the elderly any more than he needs white people or the rich.

By increasingly pointing out that the elderly have an obligation to die so that the young can inherit the earth (and the socialism), Obama knows he can seize the young vote for the Democrat Party. He will promise them the benefits that used to belong to the elderly. Which means the elderly have got to go.

I’ve pointed this out again and again: D. James Kennedy prophetically warned:

“Watch out, grandpa! Because the generation that survived abortion will one day come after you!”

You’re about to pay for your wickedness and selfishness in allowing the holocaust of 56 million murdered babies since Roe v. Wade in 1973, old people. The day is coming when you are going to be told to shove off and die with dignity so that young Obama voters can take your place.

And you are going to deserve it, even as God begins to stockpile His wrath against the final and most wicked generation of Americans who will vote for your deaths by the millions the same way you voted for babies’ deaths by the millions.

You watch with growing horror, elderly Americans: Obama is going to use his mastery of political rhetoric – based entirely on his never EVER underestimating the stupidity and wickedness of the America people – to slowly begin to turn on you. It will be just like homosexual marriage – or as great American pastor John MacArthur called it, “the Party platform of Romans Chapter One – in which Obama begins by unequivocally stating that he is opposed to it (see here and here), and then saying he’s “evolving”in spite of what he’d promised, and finally claiming that he is completely for what he had previously said that he was completely against. And then he’ll claim that anybody who used to hold the very position that he himself used to hold is evil. He’s going to frame turning on the elderly in “moral” terms, as an obligation to young people who are being deprived of benefits. And when he’s got the young behind him, he will demand that you perish in miserable deaths due to medical neglect and the confiscation of benefits that you banked your retirements upon.

Because this is God damn America, and you helped set it up.

Now you get to find out what it’s like to be “aborted.” Because it’s coming for YOU. You’re going to be the next group of death camp Jews. You’re going to be the next group of non-humans to perish.

And it wasn’t just Nancy Pelosi who lived in a bubble. Lots of prominent Democrats did. Such as DNC chairman Tim Kaine, who was predicting Democrats would keep the House of Representatives only days ago.

I don’t know if Obama and Pelosi cared one way or another; but Democrats were slaughtered for the sake of Obama’s incredibly unpopular agenda. Obama kept using the metaphor of a car and a ditch, but no matter how many “Danger, Bridge Out!” warning signs he passed, he refused to change his course as he drove his party right off a cliff.

WASHINGTON — Republicans rolled up historic gains to seize control of the House on Tuesday, as voters disenchanted with the economy, President Obama and government dealt a strong rebuke to Democrats in every corner of the country.

The GOP ousted Democratic freshmen and influential veterans, including some considered safe just weeks ago. Republicans piled up their biggest House gains since they added 80 seats in 1938: By early Wednesday, they had netted 60 formerly Democratic seats and led in four more. The GOP victory eclipsed the 54-seat pickup by the so-called “revolution” that retook the House in 1994 for the first time in 40 years and the 56-seat Republican gain in 1946.

America changed overnight in a very big way. Based upon election results at this moment, sixty percent of our country will now be led by Republican Governors. That number may grow as a few states with uncertain election results are solidified.

Yesterday, there were 37 Governor’s races and Republicans won 24 of them. Democrats took only nine, Independents took one and three are too close to call at this moment (Connecticut, Minnesota and Vermont).

This is an absolutely stunning loss for Democrats who, prior to the election, held 26 states to the 24 held by Republicans.

The balance of power has shifted and this will impact the 2012 elections as well as redistricting that will occur in each state as a result of the 2010 Census.

But as bad as that is, it gets even worse than that. We’re talking about complete devastation for Democrats in the state legislatures, where Republicans picked up a never-seen-in-history 680 state legislative seats. In doing that, they gained majorities in 14 states, and unified majorities (gaining control in both branches) in 26 states.

While the Republican gains in the House and Senate are grabbing the most headlines, the most significant results on Tuesday came in state legislatures where Republicans wiped the floor with Democrats.

Republicans picked up 680 seats in state legislatures, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures — the most in the modern era. To put that number in perspective: In the 1994 GOP wave, Republicans picked up 472 seats. The previous record was in the post-Watergate election of 1974, when Democrats picked up 628 seats.

The GOP gained majorities in at least 14 state house chambers. They now have unified control — meaning both chambers — of 26 state legislatures.

That control is a particularly bad sign for Democrats as they go into the redistricting process. If the GOP is effective in gerrymandering districts in many of these states, it could eventually lead to the GOP actually expanding its majority in 2012.

Republicans now hold the redistricting “trifecta” — both chambers of the state legislature and the governorship — in 15 states. They also control the Nebraska governorship and the unicameral legislature, taking the number up to 16. And in North Carolina — probably the state most gerrymandered to benefit Democrats — Republicans hold both chambers of the state legislature and the Democratic governor does not have veto power over redistricting proposals.

Now, for all of that butt-kicking of the Democrats and the Democrat agenda, how did the mainstream media react? Predictably.

I turned the channel from reliable, trustworthy Fox News to MSNBC and CNN. It was comical. From their coverage, you’d think that the entire election consisted in Harry Reid’s, Barbara Boxer’s, and Jerry Brown’s Democrat victories.

Barack Obama’s own Illinous Senate seat will now have a Republican’s butt-print all over it. That personalizes this ass whipping; Obama couldn’t even hold on to his own seat – even after all the previous shenanigans Democrats tried to pull. And Republicans snatched at least five other Senate seats from Democrats. But how about that Harry Reid win?

Laugh, liberals. Laugh hysterically. Laugh until you fall down and pass out.

If Senate Democrats think 2010 is a tough cycle, just wait two more years.

They’ll probably hold the Senate majority Tuesday — with a couple of seats to spare, most analysts believe. But 2012 is a different story.

By then, Republicans will be poised to take control of the Senate — with pickup possibilities scattered across the map and a much narrower base of their own to defend.

It’s not simply the lopsided mathematics — with at least 21 Democratic seats on the table in 2012, including two independents who sit with the Democrats, compared with 10 Republicans. It’s where the seats are located.

Start with Democratic seats in three states where President Barack Obama lost in 2008: Nebraska, North Dakota and Montana.

Then go down a list of where Democrats are poised to lose Senate battles this year — Ohio, Florida and Missouri, for example — and Democrats will be right back at it in 2012, defending seats there again.

Throw in some bona fide tossup states — Virginia and New Mexico — and it’s pretty hard not to picture Republicans picking off the handful of seats needed to take control, if Tuesday goes as well for the GOP as experts expect.

For the official record, Republicans won all three of those Senate battles in Ohio, Florida and Missouri.

The really funny thing is that not winning the Senate during a tough economy is actually a blessing in disguise for Republicans – who never had much more than a halfway decent chance at best to capture the Senate this year.

Obama could have run against the Republican-owned Congress, the way Bill Clinton was able to do against Republicans after they took control of both branches in 1994.

Instead, poor one-term Barry will have Harry Reid wrapped around his neck like an albatross in two years. As all those Republican governors use the power of their offices to make sure he’s a one-term president. Even as they supervise the redistricting to make it tougher for Democrats to make any kind of a comeback.

The Republican House doesn’t even have to do much, really. All they need to do is vote on popular measures: the repeal of ObamaCare; permanently extending the Bush tax cuts for everyone; capping spending at 2008 levels; maybe ending the earmark process. And if Democrats in the Senate don’t pass it, well, doom on the Democrats in the Senate.

I think of it as a beautiful case of poetic justice and dramatic reversal wrapped into two election cycles, a story where Dorothy gets to say to the wicked witch of the West (and that’s Nancy Pelosi, not Christine O’Donnell), “I’ll get you my ugly, and your little messiah too!”

Absolutely everything that the most über-hard-core conservative commentators (such as Rush Limbaugh) have said about Barack Obama has come to pass exactly as they predicted. The corrupt Chicago community organizer was totally unqualified and unprepared for the presidency, and he has proven to be a total disaster and disgrace to his own political party, along with America.

The worst thing that ever happened to the Democrat Party – to go along with the United States of America – was the election of Barack Obama. And Republicans aren’t going to let Democrats forget it. And I’m talking for years to come.

If Obamacare is completely implemented, doctors will no longer be practicing medicine. They will instead become the drones tasked with deciding who gets the meager healthcare crumbs doled out by the bureaucrats who have the ultimate power over patient life and death. Those who are deemed to have illnesses that require treatments which are not cost effective can expect a one way ticket to a hospice.

Like so many bills passed by Congress, there was a hidden provision in the Stimulus bill passed in 2009. It spends 1.1 billion dollars to create an important piece of the framework for the healthcare bill called the Coordinating Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research. It is based on the false premise that doctors in consultation with their patients don’t have the ability to make the right healthcare choices (see executive summary). The council consists of 15 people appointed by the President.

They all have one thing in common–they are all isolated from day to day patient care; and therefore, are insulated from the real practice of the art of medicine. It makes it easy to see patients as a cost center to be controlled. With views of members like Dr Emanuel, who champions the complete-lives system, it is hard to ignore the probability that senior citizens, those with chronic illness, and the very young will be on the outside looking in. This council is another example of the people of this country being told by the government that it knows what is best for us.

The framework set up by the stimulus bill merely set the stage for the implementation found in the healthcare reform bill. How can the government get doctors to participate in Obamacare thereby a) willingly destroying the doctor patient relationship, and b) betraying their Hippocratic Oath to provide treatments that they deem to be effective? Simple – fear and intimidation.

A second board created by the stimulus bill called The National Coordinator for Health Information Technology “will determine treatment at the time and place of care”. They are charged with deciding the course of treatment for the diagnosis given by the doctor. Now it becomes obvious why there has been a big push towards the implementation of universal electronic medical record use. It becomes a tool to completely control the physician and the patient. Those physicians and hospitals that choose to practice individualized patient care in consultation with their patients will be punished because they are not “meaningful users of the system over time.” Beginning January 1, 2013, penalties for doing the right thing for a patient will cost the doctor $100,000 for the first offense and jail for the second offense. This will have a chilling effect and may be the straw that completely breaks the foundation of good medicine – the doctor patient relationship.

46% of physiciansin a survey by The New England Journal of Medicine stated that they would leave the practice of medicine if Obamacare was implemented. This will only further decrease the quality of healthcare when the 30 million more people enter the system. Maybe that’s why there is a big push in the healthcare bill to increase the number of other providers such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners. There is no question that rationing will become our future. If you add 30 million more people into a system with fewer resources how could you possibly avoid rationing? Perhaps those members of Congress who passed this nightmare don’t care since they made sure that it wouldn’t apply to them.

Doctor Elaina George makes it crystal clear: ObamaCare was never about health or care; it was always about massively increasing control over the people by government. Government as God. Government as the arbiter of life and death.

Aircraft manufacturer Boeing Comany is the latest mega employer claiming the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (also known as Obamacare) is part of why its employees will have to pay more for their medical benefits next year. In a letter mailed to employees late last week, Boeing said deductibles and copayments are going up significantly for some 90,000 non-union workers due in part to the effects of the new law. (source)Continued…

President Obama and his fellow Democrats who pushed the unpopular legislation through Congress have stated repeatedly that the law would bring down individuals’ costs for health insurance. Meanwhile the debate over the obscenely expensive bill raged on with Republican lawmakers and the majority of the American people speaking out against the far-reaching government power grab disguised as reform. Announcements like Boeing’s are proving the opposition right.

Boeing joins other companies like 3M which earlier this month announced it will stop offering its health insurance plan to their 23,000 retirees in response to Obamacare’s passage. (source)

While Boeing cited two additional reasons for the cost shift including untamed health care inflation and lifestyle issues such as being overweight, company spokeswoman Karen Forte said the company is concerned that its relatively generous plan will get hit with a new tax under the law in 2018.

Democrats are moral idiots who think, “Someone else will be paying for it, so it must be the right thing to do.”

Businesses are raising the costs employees will have to pay, or else they are simply dropping coverage altogether. And those businesses and most every single other business are holding back on hiring because of ObamaCare, massive and unnecessary regulations, taxes, and basically Barack Obama and the Democrat Party in general.

This whole ObamaCare thing is just working out great.

Democrats are refusing to talk about the massive boondoggle they cursed America with. Don’t you forget that curse when you vote in two weeks.

I recently wrote a post about how vile the left was for infiltrating Tea Party events with the intent to wave vile signs and wear vile T-shirts and espouse vile views in order to create an illegitimate image of Tea Party hate and intolerance. So you can only imagine how startled and shocked I was to discover that it appears that there are rightwing plants responding to the leftwing plants with infiltration tactics of their own.

But this would appear to be evidence that such “counter-planting” is occurring:

“The Parking Ticket”

Working people frequently ask retired people what they do to make their days interesting.

Well, for example, the other day my wife and I went into town and went into a shop. We were only in there for about 5 minutes. When we came out, there was a cop writing out a parking ticket. We went up to him and said, ‘Come on man, how about giving a senior citizen a break?’

He ignored us and continued writing the ticket. I called him a Nazi turd. He glared at me and started writing another ticket for having worn tires. So my wife called him a ___-head. He finished the second ticket and put it on the windshield with the first. Then he started writing a third ticket. This went on for about 20 minutes. The more we abused him, the more tickets he wrote.

Personally, we didn’t care. We came into town by bus and the car had an Obama sticker on it. We try to have a little fun each day now that we’re retired. We think it’s important at our age.

I got that sent to me via email. And it was just too funny not to post, given all the “infiltrators” and “plants” and “crashers,”

You’d better be careful that your “plant” tactics don’t come back at you with a vengeance, you lefties.

Since ObamaCare passed, we on the right have a near monopoly on senior citizens with bus passes and grudges.

Member of the audience. Jane Sturm: “My mother is now over 105. But at 100, the doctors said to her, ‘I can’t do anything more unless you have a pacemaker.’ I said, ‘Go for it.’ She said, ‘Go for it.’ But the specialist said, ‘No, she’s too old.’ But when the other specialist saw her and saw her joy of life, he said, ‘I’m going for it.’ That was over five years ago. My question to you is: Outside the medical criteria for prolonging life for somebody who is elderly, is there any consideration that can be given for a certain spirit, a certain joy of living, a quality of life, or is it just a medical cutoff at a certain age?”

Obama: “I don’t think that we can make judgments based on people’s ’spirit.’ Uh, that would be, uh, a pretty subjective decision to be making. I think we have to have rules that, uh, say that, uh, we are going to provide good quality care for all people. End-of-life care is one of the most difficult sets of decisions that we’re going to have to make. But understand that those decisions are already being made in one way or another. If they’re not being made under Medicare and Medicaid, they’re being made by private insurers. At least we can let doctors know — and your mom know — that you know what, maybe this isn’t going to help.Maybe you’re better off, uhh, not having the surgery, but, uhh, taking the painkiller.”

You can watch the exchange for yourself:

What is remarkable is the fact that this woman Jane Sturm was seeking reassurance that Obama would clearly and unequivocally affirm the elderly mother’s right to life, and Obama responded by telling her that maybe mom should just take a painkiller and die as a drugged-out zombie-veg due to government-sanctioned medical neglect.